Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Proteomic Analysis of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Secretome in Comparison to Leukocyte- and Platelet-Rich Fibrin

Al-Sharabi N., Gruber R., Sanz M., Mohamed-Ahmed S., Kristoffersen EK., Mustafa K.

Laboratory Study with a reported sample of 550 on Chronic Wound, published in Int J Mol Sci (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
Int J Mol Sci (2023)
Reported sample size
550
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
37685865
PMCID
PMC10487446
DOI
10.3390/ijms241713057
Citations
8

Abstract (original English)

Secretomes of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) are emerging as a novel growth factor (GF)-based strategy for periodontal and bone regeneration. The objective of this study was to compare the secretome of human bone marrow MSC (BMSC) to that of leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF), an established GF-based therapy, in the context of wound healing and regeneration. Conditioned media from human BMSCs (BMSC-CM) and L-PRF (LPRF-CM) were subjected to quantitative proteomic analysis using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Global profiles, gene ontology (GO) categories, differentially expressed proteins (DEPs), and gene set enrichment (GSEA) were identified using bioinformatic methods. Concentrations of selected proteins were determined using a multiplex immunoassay. Among the proteins identified in BMSC-CM (2157 proteins) and LPRF-CM (1420 proteins), 1283 proteins were common. GO analysis revealed similarities between the groups in terms of biological processes (cellular organization, protein metabolism) and molecular functions (cellular/protein-binding). Notably, more DEPs were identified in BMSC-CM ( n = 550) compared to LPRF-CM ( n = 118); these included several key GF, cytokines, and extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins involved in wound healing. GSEA revealed enrichment of ECM (especially bone ECM)-related processes in BMSC-CM and immune-related processes

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
LeukocytesMesenchymal Stem CellsHumansExtracellular Matrix ProteinsProteomicsPlatelet-Rich FibrinSecretome

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research